Now his track record isn't exactly... stellar. He wrote X Men: The Last Stand and Jumper, among others.

However, he DID write the first Sherlock Holmes, which is a movie franchise I love, and seems to have a good track record as a producer, which includes First Class and Neil Blomkamps' upcoming flick which is guaranteed to be awesome coming from the same visionary behind District 9.

At some point, this logic falls apart. Past failures don't ensure future failures, no more than past excellence is indicative of future excellence. I'm slightly optimistic because there are more voices in the conversation than just Lucas. Lucas' tight grip on the prequels was problematic and it's telling that when help was brought in on ROTS, the result was the best movie of the PT. I'm encouraged by the names I'm seeing and I'm certain that Disney is taking care to guard its new gold mine. They are fully aware of the stakes, especially in regards to the ST and the first 2 spin off films.

I'm fairly certain that the ST will be quite good. Well, at least, I'm hoping...

Mr & Mrs Smith is a great script, top to bottom. I also think that X-Men 3 and This Means War were underrated. Jumper's script ... not the worst thing ever, mostly it's just that the movie itself is a tad lifeless. I like the first Sherlock Holmes well enough but much of what carried that was the chemistry between Law and Downey.

Overall, the guy can write action flicks and toss in a few funny / cool lines here and there. Not the worst pedigree to have if you're rolling into a Star Wars script.

I recall digging the second Holmes more, but the first was fun too. I'm actually a little less enthused about Kasdan. Can't say he's done anything I've liked outside of Star Wars/Indy, which leaves me a bit wary if Lucas's involvement isn't going to be all that significant.

Wasn't Kasdan also behind the Godawful Kevin Costner epic Wyatt Earp? Yeah they both have their flaws.

Wyatt Earp was not a godawful movie. It had its problems but it was anchored by some great performances. Kasdan blemishes are mainly Dreamcatcher(which was a middling Stephen King novel to begin with). The worst culprit was "Darling Companion" which is just awful.

Outside of those two films, his filmography is filled with serviceable or outstanding stuff. In fact, Kasdan hasn't done genre in a while. This may be "getting back to his roots" sort of speak.

I'm not worried abou Kasdan at all to be honest. Kinberg, on the other hand, doesn't have quite the resume. He is mostly middling to poor with one real exception being "Xmen: First Class". That movie was well written for a comic book movie.

So, he does have the capability to do solid work, but its the exception not the rule.

Mr & Mrs Smith is a great script, top to bottom. I also think that X-Men 3 and This Means War were underrated. Jumper's script ... not the worst thing ever, mostly it's just that the movie itself is a tad lifeless. I like the first Sherlock Holmes well enough but much of what carried that was the chemistry between Law and Downey.

Overall, the guy can write action flicks and toss in a few funny / cool lines here and there. Not the worst pedigree to have if you're rolling into a Star Wars script.

And don't forget, Kasdan and Kinsberg are also working with Arndt and Abrams. I'd bet that they are all reading each others scripts and providing input.

Also this, I doubt each screenwriter for each flick is working in their own little sealed Mouse cubicle.

I thought Jumper was pretty good. It was a cool idea and the supporting cast was good. I think had they gone a different route for the leading actor and not chosen Hayden Christensen it would have not felt so lifeless. His acting is so stiff, no emotion at all.

That being said, it's not like Kasdan is a saint or anything. He's had some real stinkers before in the past, too, particularly recently.

It's easy to criticize filmmakers and writers from an armchair perspective, as many of us do, but the truth is, past works don't necessarily mean good or bad future works, (or, I guess, vice versa, if that makes sense?). Clint Eastwood is perhaps one of the most well known and respected American directors in cinema history, but he sure did direct (and also star) in some stinkers. Ben Affleck isn't really that great of an actor, but in his short directorial career, he's demonstrated how good of a director he is.

With that said, it's perhaps ironic that I really hope that Orci and Kurtzman are not involved in any Star Wars projects whatsoever, lol

That being said, it's not like Kasdan is a saint or anything. He's had some real stinkers before in the past, too, particularly recently.

It's easy to criticize filmmakers and writers from an armchair perspective, as many of us do, but the truth is, past works don't necessarily mean good or bad future works, (or, I guess, vice versa, if that makes sense?). Clint Eastwood is perhaps one of the most well known and respected American directors in cinema history, but he sure did direct (and also star) in some stinkers. Ben Affleck isn't really that great of an actor, but in his short directorial career, he's demonstrated how good of a director he is.

With that said, it's perhaps ironic that I really hope that Orci and Kurtzman are not involved in any Star Wars projects whatsoever, lol

True. However, I do feel that if someone consistently puts out terrible films, that should rate negatively against them. Someone who only had a couple bad films (Kinberg) shouldn't have it held against them.

I thought Jumper was pretty good. It was a cool idea and the supporting cast was good. I think had they gone a different route for the leading actor and not chosen Hayden Christensen it would have not felt so lifeless. His acting is so stiff, no emotion at all.

Hayden was fine in Jumper - for what he was given. The book was so much different and better.

Be fair now, X-Men 3 at least got in one solid Magneto monologue, which is pretty much a standard passing grade for any X-Men movie. (Of course, it was delivered by Ian McKellen so, y'know, the guy can make an ingredient list for cookies sound like a stirring march to arms)

The thing bout Kingberg is that you can't just take his scripts into account. You have to take the face that he's worked extensively as a script doctor into account too. He may have saved more good movies than made bad movies. I don't know what to think about him for that reason.

Be fair now, X-Men 3 at least got in one solid Magneto monologue, which is pretty much a standard passing grade for any X-Men movie. (Of course, it was delivered by Ian McKellen so, y'know, the guy can make an ingredient list for cookies sound like a stirring march to arms)

Yeah...X-Men 3's problem isn't the script per se, IMO. It's the story that's the problem-it just doesn't make an awful lot of sense and ignores a fair amount of continuity from the last film. Plus having a guy who's literally directed one good film in his whole career be the director didn't help either